Why occupying coalition should give power back to the people of Iraq

LIFE must have been sweet for Jacques Chirac, albeit fleetingly, as he watched TV on Monday night. There, on his screen, was the American president sending out an SOS for more allies to join the struggling US-dominated coalition in Iraq.

But George W. Bush failed to impress Chirac, because it seems he wants only cash and troops. For the rest, the man in the White House is sticking to his present strategy – or to the lack of it.

However, the fact that more American soldiers have been killed in Iraq since Bush declared the war was officially over than during the conflict itself, should have given the Texan second thoughts. Iraq is at present a mess, and Bush is pursuing a failed policy.

Those European countries which opposed the war can savour the satisfaction of seeing America stuck; but they will expect a better deal before stepping in, or risk losing face. In short, they will only pledge to send in troops if the United Nations gets a more prominent role in the reconstruction of Iraq.

However, the million-dollar question is this: can an occupation embellished by the United Nations’ flag, and more money, sort out the chaos of Iraq?

Sadly not. Giving the UN a primary role in managing post-Saddam Iraq would certainly improve the security climate in the country. It would be the best way to legitimize the toppling of the dictator and present reconstruction efforts. But while bringing the UN in the front line is a necessity, it will not be sufficient on its own.

The only way to curb the spiralling violence is to empower Iraqis to govern themselves. The occupying coalition should come up with a clear timetable for handing power over to a sovereign government. This would make it much harder for the tiny minority of former regime loyalists to gain new recruits among the ranks of those opposed to a foreign occupation.

There will be no security in Iraq without sovereignty, a spokesman for the US-appointed transitional governing council recently acknowledged. “Security will come after Iraq is sovereign and not the other way around,” he warned. If a friend of America said that, we can imagine what its enemies are ready to threaten.

The Iraqis are hungry for power and eager to take the reins of their own country, after half a century of bloody dictatorships.

It is undisputable that they need the coalition troops to fill the power vacuum and ensure that the country does not fall prey to a civil war. The recent murders of Shia clerics and an attack against a Sunni mosque demonstrate that age-old conflicts, frozen by the dictator’s iron fist, are simmering again in Iraq. The coalition forces must remain in Iraq to protect its borders, deflect internal conflicts and prevent Iraq becoming a haven for the world’s terrorists.

But political decisions and the question of what sort of society the country needs must be made by the Iraqis themselves.

A greater role for the United Nations would be one step better than the present US-led occupation. It would also provide a sweetener for the western countries who opposed the war and now need a credible explanation for making a volte-face. But it would not make a vast difference to those who oppose a foreign presence in Iraq and want power to be given back to the people.

The only solution to prevent Iraq becoming a breeding ground for terrorism and anti-Americanism, and to enable the country to get out of the mess it is in, is to come up with a clear plan to devolve power to the local authorities.

The way West Germany was run by the occupying coalition after the Second World War is a good example to follow. Like in Germany, a local government should be in charge of running the country, but a coalition authority should keep the right to veto its decisions and intervene in cases of flagrant violation of human rights or unacceptable authoritarianism.

The occupiers should prevent another Saddam Hussein from taking over in the present power vacuum. They should defend the country, which has no army, and protect its porous borders against a flow of terrorists. But they should not decide on Iraq’s school curricula.

The new UN Security Council resolution that the Bush administration is currently preparing should include a plan to hand over decision-making power to Iraqis – following the German model.

Western diplomats whisper privately that the locals will not be able to take the lead now, that they are unprepared or even perpetually unfit to install democracy. The argument that it would not work because, while Germany had a democratic tradition before the Nazis, Iraq never experienced democracy, is not convincing.

Nobody is talking of ‘our’ type of democracy, which would anyway never work in Iraq with its society based on myriad religious, ethnic and tribal links.

Iraq will have to find a stable political system that provides for a fair distribution of resources and equivalent rights to its religious and ethnic groups. The West has to help them find their own democracy or fairness.

They can do it. After all, they are the people who discovered the wheel and invented writing.